House of Commons photoWon her last election, in 2021, with 50% of the vote.
Natural Resources April 30th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, since 1993 the Liberal government has cut hundreds of millions of dollars from Canada's centre of scientific excellence, the Chalk River Nuclear Laboratory. The CAT scan and the MRI technologies were developed at this world class facility.
When will the government make good on its election promise and cut a cheque for the Canadian neutron facility to be built at Chalk River?
Natural Resources April 30th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Natural Resources. Recently Atomic Energy of Canada was forced to lay off workers at its Chalk River site. These are people with young families. Prospects for local employment are not great.
When could we expect to hear the announcement that the Canadian neutron facility will be funded at Chalk River?
Parks Canada April 25th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, park wardens in our national parks have a proud tradition of service. The decision by Parks Canada to replace wardens with RCMP officers at double the cost of fully training and equipping a park warden does not resolve the problem of unsafe working conditions. Issuing shotguns to patrolling wardens only heightens the potential for violence when a non-confrontational approach is needed.
The problem is that you cannot look at the activity to determine the danger. Risk is determined by a subject's behaviour. Therefore, being told to back away by Parks Canada management is not appropriate.
The pending decision to locate a detachment of RCMP officers in every national park in Canada is costly and unnecessary and, in the case of Ontario and Quebec, an unacceptable intrusion into provincial jurisdiction.
The Minister of Canadian Heritage should do the right thing and allow park wardens the right to bear sidearms.
Resource Industries April 24th, 2001
Mr. Chairman, I have three brief questions to ask the government. One of Canada's natural non-renewable resources sector petroleum products appears to be in short deliverable supply. Does the Ministry of Natural Resources feel that reactor generated energy is necessary as part of Canada's energy mix?
Parliament Of Canada Act April 24th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to rise today on behalf of the official opposition to speak to Bill S-10, an act to amend the Parliament of Canada Act respecting the establishment of a parliamentary poet laureate.
On behalf of the Canadian Alliance, the notion of a poet laureate certainly appeals in a civilized sense to the beauty of the spoken word. We on this side of the House are probably more sensitive to the spoken word because in the political forum we call question period our words are swords with which we do justice on behalf of the Canadian people every day. It is with considerable interest that we in the official opposition view anything in parliament that has to do with the spoken word.
I wish to speak to the hurt the spoken or written word can inflict on others, particularly when it is used for malicious intent. I refer to a magazine article that was recently published in an Ottawa city news magazine. The writer's story was about a murder trial in my riding of Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke. It has taken on a certain sensationalist reporting, much in the style of the popular U.S. tabloids. I wish to read into the official record what the news magazine had to say about the beautiful rural community in which the murder took place.
The community is not one of those nice little towns that dot southern and eastern Ontario. It is more like a rural freak show—a railway town without a railway—where most people make their money in the fall either by catering to deer hunters or by bringing in the marijuana harvest from up in the hills behind the village. Many of the older residents are the simple Ottawa Valley folk who are the butt of so many recycled Newfie jokes—
I wanted to read this fictionalized garbage into the record, and there is more, to emphasize the emotional effect that words can have on a listener. When I read this hate literature, and I use the term sparingly because I know it is a powerful term and I do not intend to minimalize anyone else's experience with hate literature, I felt immediate contempt, if not downright disgust for a publication which would slander an entire community for the sake of a few dollars in the guise of being a news magazine.
Once that spoken or written word is distributed it becomes easier for the next media to come along and build on the original myth. This article was followed by a shot at the entire Ottawa valley community under the veil of humour by the tax dollar funded national broadcaster when in its program The Royal Canadian Air Farce suggested that inbreeding was a cottage industry in Ontario ridings held by Canadian Alliance members.
I have a problem with public servants disguised as journalists, or in this case a poet. I would expect safeguards to be built into the position of poet laureate. Poets have the ability to stir up powerful emotions in the same way as a writer. As we consider the office of poet laureate, we must be cognizant of this fact. Is this position intended to unify us as a nation or is it intended to stir us up?
I have read with great interest the debates in the other place regarding the bill. There are many more questions in my mind than time will allow today. I have great difficulty with the proposed legislation which goes to the very heart of what we are discussing.
Is the position of poet laureate appropriate in a country like Canada that has evolved into a multicultural mosaic? I make this point because in the examples of those countries such as Great Britain which have created positions of poet laureate, they are very dissimilar to our experience in that theirs is a monocultural experience.
The observation has been made that it is appropriate for there to be one poet laureate. Should there not be two to reflect the bicultural nature of our institutions? While that may reflect the English-French diversity, what about the first nations people? This past century has been characterized by a migration that is neither French nor English. We are a work in progress when it comes to the society we are building in the northern half of this continent.
Do we as parliamentarians want to associate ourselves with one voice that will not be able, by virtue of the way that the craft of poetry is reflected, to reflect the nation we have become in the 21st century?
I believe it was stated in the other place that leadership depends upon individual voices leading. What the position would be able to achieve would depend upon what leadership and what voices. I fear that a poet laureate would be constrained by the official position and so defeat the purpose for which it was intended.
I commend the sponsors of the bill for the spirit in which the proposal has been brought forward. I look forward to continued debate on the subject.
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation April 23rd, 2001
Mr. Speaker, the summit of the Americas was an opportunity for Canada's publicly funded national network to keep the world informed.
Imagine my disappointment on behalf of all Canadians when, during the height of the demonstrations, with the acrid stench of tear gas in the air, summit participants were forced to turn to CNN rather than the CBC to find out what was happening in the streets of Quebec City.
We were sequestered as a group, observers and participants from the 34 summit nations, locked within the perimeter, not knowing if all of Quebec City was on fire.
Canadians from across this nation have been telling me that the money given to the CBC would be better spent on things like truly accessible health care and more affordable housing.
Once again the CBC has squandered an opportunity to demonstrate that the billion or so dollars of taxpayer money spent on the CBC is not a waste of money.
Telecommunications April 5th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question is for the Minister of Industry. As it is obviously in the best interest of Canadians to have the Broadcasting Act and the Telecommunications Act under the responsibility of a single minister, will the minister act now to ensure that the future of the Broadcasting Act and the Telecommunications Act will be decided by the marketplace and not by some misguided notion that government should pick winners and losers in a 500 channel world?
Telecommunications April 5th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, in a world of 500 digital channels Canadians are telling us that choice is what they want in television. Government policy currently forces viewers to subscribe to television services, to pay for channels they do not want because they have to buy a bundle of programs in order to get the shows they do want.
Since the technology exists, will the Minister of Canadian Heritage act now so that consumers only pay for what they want rather than being forced to pay for what they do not want?
Auditor General March 30th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, on February 15 of this year the minister stated that the auditor general was wrong and CIDA was right.
Questions asked of the minister soon after the release of the auditor general's report again gave the minister the opportunity to admit her mistake. She did not.
Why did the minister send her official to do what she should have done herself and take the blame for her department's $6.3 million mistake?
Auditor General March 30th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, in his 2000 report the auditor general condemned CIDA for a lack of due diligence in awarding a $6.3 million contract to Transelec, a company owned by a close friend of the Prime Minister. A senior CIDA official admitted in public accounts committee that CIDA had made a mistake in awarding the contract to Transelec.
Why, after numerous questions in the House on this issue, did the minister responsible for CIDA never once admit that her department made a $6.3 million mistake?